Table of Contents

Main

Articles
Pan the Tool-Maker
Latest Homo erectus of Java
Neandertal mtDNA
Middle Stone Age Bone Industry from Katanda
Pedra Furanda
Venus Figures

Web Sites
The Ancient Indus Valley
Stolen Stones: The Modern Sack of Nineveh
Clovis and Beyond
Chimpanzee Cultures
Oldstoneage.com

ROM Visits
Egypt Exhibit
Evolution of Man Exhibit

Bibliography 		Toth, N., Schick, K.D., Savage-Rumbaugh, E.S., Sevcik, R.A., Rumbaugh, D.M. 1993. Pan the Tool-Maker: Investigations into the Stone Tool-Making and Tool-Using Capabilities of a Bonobo (Pan paniscus). Journal of Archaeological Science. v. 20, p. 81-91.

The main goal of this study was to research bonobos (they used a specific male named Kanzi), and try to ascertain possible congitive and biomedical conditions of pre-adaptation for lithic technology that may be present in extant apes. They also wanted to compare bonobo tool-making abilities to early hominids in order to understand the complexities of this derived behaviour pattern in the earliest stone tool-makers.

The article then details Kanzi's learning of stone tool manufacturing. This went in the sequence of 1) hitting one rock with another, 2) hitting a rock with another with greater force, 3) developing a throwing technique, 4) more precise hitting of one rock with another, and 5) development of a directed-throwing technique.


This is a picture of Kanzi hitting one rock with another.

The article states that Kanzi had rapidly developed a successful technique of stone tool-making, but that he hadn't learned to search for acute angles.

They state that it is not yet clear if this is due to experience, biomedical constraints on core and hammer manipulation due to the musculoskeletal structure of his arms and hands, or to cognitive abilities of the brain.

I think this study is very important evolutionary research into the early development of hominids. It is really interesting to understand what exactly divides us from our chimpanzee sistergroup.

I also have several critiques of this article, however. I think there may be a problem in using Kanzi. They say that he was bread and raised in captivity, and that he was taught "language." So, using him may not be representitive of the natural tendancies of bonobos in the wild.

I aslo think they should have tested other primates (such as gorillas or orangutans). If these primates showed some or a similar amount of learning, what would this mean for hominid evolution?

This article also assumes the static development of chimps. In other words, humans have obviously developed greatly over our 100,000 years of existence, but chimpanzees are assumed to have remained the same over their millions of years of existence.

My final critique is that so far they have only used one bonobo. To get an accurate picture of the bonobo species, they will need to test many hundreds of different individuals. The authors do, however, say that they will also test other bonobos in the future.

Next Page